Ski Trab Mistico.2 Ski
Finally, after years of waiting, the mystical Mistico.2 has arrived. Compared to the 1st generation, the Mistico.2 sports a revised geometry, designed to provide better flotation in soft snow and easier turn initiation. The 14-layer Italian construction is made with careful attention to detail, providing the on-snow performance properties of the iconic cars that share its homeland, leaving you gasping with exhilaration after every run. This 14-layer construction also provides exceptional durability, helping keep your skis intact for many seasons of fun. Like a loving yet stern Italian grandmother, a layer of 3k carbon is wrapped around the core of the ski, allowing the Mistico.2 to keep the robust torsional rigidity its predecessor was known for while flexing longitudinally just enough to be compliant in other snow types. As Ski Trab themselves attest, the Mistico.2 provides the best combination of uphill and downhill performance. While we didn't think anything could top the original Mistico, we are pleased to report the Mistico.2 has found a way.
- Honeycomb Aramid core delivers performance, lightness, and durability.
- Revised geometry provides better handling across a wide array of snow types than its predecessor.
- High Modular Carbon Cage surrounds the core to provide torsional stiffness without being overly harsh.
- High-end base material and HRC 52 steel edges provide durability and precision.
- Attivo.2 tip and tail skin attachment points allow you to rip the precut skins from the tip, similar to a race ski.
- Ski Trab backs up its product with an excellent, 3-year warranty.
- Made in Bormio with exquisite attention to detail.
| Specifications | |
| Lengths (cm) | 157, 164, 171, 178 |
|
Weight |
1020g [157] 1060g [164] 1100g [171] 1135g [178] |
| Weight (pair) | 2040g [157] 2120g [164] 2200g [171] 2270g [178] |
|
|
122-92-109 [157] 122-92-109 [164] 122-90-109 [171] 122-90-109 [178] |
|
Turn |
19.1m [157] 21.2m [164] 21.5m [171] 23.6m [178] |
|
Skin |
Attivo.2 tip & tail |
| Specs Verified | 171 & 178 only |
| Design | |
|
|
Tip rocker, camber underfoot, slight tail rocker |
|
|
Medium sidecut |
|
|
14-layer cap |
|
|
Aramid honeycomb Aero |
| Skimo Co Says | |
| Usage | All-mountain, all-conditions |
| Notes | 3 year warranty |
| Bottom Line | The best combination of uphill to downhill performance in the Ski Trab line |
| Compare to other Mid-fat Skis | |
Related Products
Questions & Reviews
2/12/2025
Hi, I'm just curious about your opinion (and experience on terrain) when I have to compare the Mistico with the Maestro and the Magico. Looking at Skitrab website, there is a chart to compare them, but they all look top of the line. Picking the 171mm, I'd probably go with the Mistico, just because of the 90mm underfoot. But I guess this doesn't explain it all. Could you add something more? I guess I'm not the only one interested here....
2/12/2025
Hi Walter,
Being different waist widths, the other skis in the line have different uses/strengths! The Maestro is a race/mountaineering/training ski at 76mm. It is excellent for moving uphill quickly, and ideal for skinning in firmer conditions. It's a joy on the skin track. It is a fun ski on the downhill, but requires more care and finesse due to the smaller waist, especially in adverse conditions.
At 85mm underfoot, the Magico is the middle width and maybe the most versatile. It benefits from the narrower waist and lighter weight on the skin track, and is awesome for mountaineering and steep skiing but can still float pretty well in soft snow. It is light enough to be a fitness/recreational race ski as well for some users!
The Mistico is the most downhill-focused of the three at 90mm. It is the most dynamic and aggressive ski on the downhill, and the wider width makes it great in powder and able to punch through crud more effectively. It can be driven harder than the other two, and will reward someone who wants a lightweight ski that they can ski fast and aggressively on!
Being different waist widths, the other skis in the line have different uses/strengths! The Maestro is a race/mountaineering/training ski at 76mm. It is excellent for moving uphill quickly, and ideal for skinning in firmer conditions. It's a joy on the skin track. It is a fun ski on the downhill, but requires more care and finesse due to the smaller waist, especially in adverse conditions.
At 85mm underfoot, the Magico is the middle width and maybe the most versatile. It benefits from the narrower waist and lighter weight on the skin track, and is awesome for mountaineering and steep skiing but can still float pretty well in soft snow. It is light enough to be a fitness/recreational race ski as well for some users!
The Mistico is the most downhill-focused of the three at 90mm. It is the most dynamic and aggressive ski on the downhill, and the wider width makes it great in powder and able to punch through crud more effectively. It can be driven harder than the other two, and will reward someone who wants a lightweight ski that they can ski fast and aggressively on!
2/12/2025
Thanks Carlos,
I'm sold for the Mistico, considering the terrain where I typically ski.
I weigh 185 lbs, 180cm tall, expert skier, would you recommend 171cm or 178cm?
I'm sold for the Mistico, considering the terrain where I typically ski.
I weigh 185 lbs, 180cm tall, expert skier, would you recommend 171cm or 178cm?
2/12/2025
Hi Walter,
You are right on the border where you could ski either! I would consider your boot choice. If you are pairing the ski with a beefier, stiffer boot and want to emphasize downhill performance, I would opt for the 178cm. If you're using a lighter boot (i.e. sub 1200 grams, tongueless boot), the 171cm will be easier to handle and easier on the uphill.
You are right on the border where you could ski either! I would consider your boot choice. If you are pairing the ski with a beefier, stiffer boot and want to emphasize downhill performance, I would opt for the 178cm. If you're using a lighter boot (i.e. sub 1200 grams, tongueless boot), the 171cm will be easier to handle and easier on the uphill.
Answer this question:
2/12/2025
How would these in a 171 length pair with La Sportiva kilo boot for volcano season and spring couloirs? 6ft, 165lbs, level 3 skier.
2/12/2025
Hi Taylor,
The Mistico.2 would be a great choice for that kind of skiing! It is a fun ski to rip at high speeds, and is super light on the uphill. The 90mm width is a good size for spring skiing.
The Mistico.2 is a pretty stiff ski with a lot of downhill performance to offer. You could certainly ski it with the Kilo and have a good time, but I do also think you'd be able to get more out of the ski with a stiffer/beefier boot.
The Mistico.2 would be a great choice for that kind of skiing! It is a fun ski to rip at high speeds, and is super light on the uphill. The 90mm width is a good size for spring skiing.
The Mistico.2 is a pretty stiff ski with a lot of downhill performance to offer. You could certainly ski it with the Kilo and have a good time, but I do also think you'd be able to get more out of the ski with a stiffer/beefier boot.
2/12/2025
I appreciate your input. The Kilo seems to be the boot that works best for my feet for long days. Are there any skis that are maybe a step down from the mistico you'd recommend. Something that can be skied quite hard with a boot like the Kilo.
2/13/2025
Hi Taylor,
I would consider the Ski Trab Ortles 90! It is the same shape as the Mistico.2, but has a little bit less pronounced camber and a rounder flex thanks to the Liwood Air core. It is a more forgiving ski, and more amenable to being skied with lighter and softer boots. It is still a very high performing ski for the weight class that can be pushed hard when conditions are right!
I would consider the Ski Trab Ortles 90! It is the same shape as the Mistico.2, but has a little bit less pronounced camber and a rounder flex thanks to the Liwood Air core. It is a more forgiving ski, and more amenable to being skied with lighter and softer boots. It is still a very high performing ski for the weight class that can be pushed hard when conditions are right!
Answer this question:
1/15/2025
Would Alien 1.1 be enough boot to drive this ski for general touring in a variety of conditions? Or would I be much better off with a Maestro or Magico? I like the idea of having a larger ski without too much weight penalty but not if it’s a poor choice for my skimo boots.
1/15/2025
Hi Led, this ski can be quite punishing when ridden with race boots. The Maestro or Ortles would be a better match, noting both can also be driven harder with beefier boots.
Answer this question:
2/29/2024
Hi. Just wondering, im 1.76 cm, what size would you recommend for a springtouring ski?
decently good skier, havent decided on using la sportiva solar or scarpa f1's.
decently good skier, havent decided on using la sportiva solar or scarpa f1's.
2/29/2024
Hi there,
I would go with the 171cm length in this ski. It is a pretty stiff and aggressive ski, not one you want to size too long.
I would go with the 171cm length in this ski. It is a pretty stiff and aggressive ski, not one you want to size too long.
Answer this question:
I'll bite. I've got about 10-15k on these, not much but I know how they ski now. At first I was intimidated based on the recommendations and sizing, I am 6'1/185 cm and 205lbs, seeing that a 199cm skier was told they could ski the 178 or 171 boggled my mind and I assumed it must be an incredibly demanding ski. I did not want to compromise surface area for float and I ski 191 heavy skis regularly so figured I should be able to handle a 178 no matter how demanding. Based on my past with trab, relative mount point preferences, and boot choice I decided that it should behave pretty normal and not be punishing if I bumped the mount up so I mounted +1.5 cm with trab race binders which I think suits floppy light boots (I am skiing them with F1 XTs). This worked a charm for me and I feel like the ski is very neutral, predictable and not punishing. That being said, it's a 1100g ski. So the behaviors of that weight class are still present. However the overall composure as long as you just keep trusting it is best in class. I also would expect that it certainly would be punishing if you mounted on line and got sloppy or were not a physically strong skier. I can manhandle it if I get knocked backwards without much effort but it obviously prefers forward skiing. It is incredibly stiff and cambered, fun to carve longer radius turns.
So my recommendation is size down if you you want to mount on line and use floppy light boots. size more true to size and go +1 or 1.5 cm to ski with floppy boots and have a casual experience. If you want a game on ski that will punish you and have supportive boots then go more true to size (I just average the mount points of most of skis and generally prefer around -10 from center). Also if you are not heavier bodyweight wise I'd also expect it to be more demanding and err on downsizing.
Trab durability has always been top in class so no worries there. I think that use case for skis of this weight are pretty nil but if you know where you would want to use it or want a fitness ski with some good surface area relative to weight then its hard to beat. A good citizen race ski for a Clydesdale.
So my recommendation is size down if you you want to mount on line and use floppy light boots. size more true to size and go +1 or 1.5 cm to ski with floppy boots and have a casual experience. If you want a game on ski that will punish you and have supportive boots then go more true to size (I just average the mount points of most of skis and generally prefer around -10 from center). Also if you are not heavier bodyweight wise I'd also expect it to be more demanding and err on downsizing.
Trab durability has always been top in class so no worries there. I think that use case for skis of this weight are pretty nil but if you know where you would want to use it or want a fitness ski with some good surface area relative to weight then its hard to beat. A good citizen race ski for a Clydesdale.
Comment on this review:
12/31/2023
Hello!
I am 199cm tall and very interested in the Mistico, but I'm worried the 178 would be too short for me. I'm a good skiier in all conditions. I'd like to use the ski all season for fitness laps as well as be able to take it out for tours in fresh powder.
If you think it's too short, do you have any recommendations for other super light touring skis that are available in a longer size?
Thanks for your advice!
I am 199cm tall and very interested in the Mistico, but I'm worried the 178 would be too short for me. I'm a good skiier in all conditions. I'd like to use the ski all season for fitness laps as well as be able to take it out for tours in fresh powder.
If you think it's too short, do you have any recommendations for other super light touring skis that are available in a longer size?
Thanks for your advice!
12/31/2023
Hi Taylor, this ski is OK to go shorter than usual. It's quite a powerful ski and the tail is quite supportive, such that the longer lengths can be a handful. If you're on the lighter side, and especially for fitness laps, you would do just fine on the 178 in my opinion.
1/1/2024
I just registered an account to respond and say thank you for the quick and great advice! And also thank you for making this website become such an incredible, valuable resource for everyone. Happy new year!
Answer this question:
10/25/2023
Hello!
I am wondering what the technical/construction differences are between the Ski Trab Ortles 90 and this ski, both in the 171 cm length? How does that correspond to performance and/or ideal use?
You folks are the best, I appreciate any help y'all can provide,
Cheers!
I am wondering what the technical/construction differences are between the Ski Trab Ortles 90 and this ski, both in the 171 cm length? How does that correspond to performance and/or ideal use?
You folks are the best, I appreciate any help y'all can provide,
Cheers!
10/27/2023
Hi Sam, the Mistico.2 uses Trab's Honeycomb Aramid core, which is impressively strong and damp for its weight. The Mistico.2 is a stout and generally stiffer ski. The Ortles 90 uses a variation on their Liwood core to achieve dampness and a rounder flex profile at a slightly heavier weight, particularly in the tails where it is noticeably softer and friendlier than the Mistico.2. Size for size, the Mistico.2 rewards great technique whereas the Ortles 90 allows for more variability in how they'll allow you to ski them.
Please feel free to reach out to help@skimo.co for more details!
Please feel free to reach out to help@skimo.co for more details!
Answer this question:
Earn store credit by writing reviews. Learn more.
